In
the description of M. marshalli, the name "Cloud-forest
Screech-Owl" was suggested (Weske & Terborgh 1981). The compound name
seems to have arisen later and is used in some other publications (e.g. Marks
et al. 1999). Although "Rainforest" is a frequently used compound word,
"Cloudforest" is not so commonly seen. The hyphenated form
"Cloud-forest" is used for one other species on SACC (Cloud-forest
Pygmy-Owl Glaucidium nubicola), which coincidentally is in the same
family. The hyphenated version was also suggested in the description G.
nubicola (Robbins & Stiles 1999). "Cloud-forest Brush-Finch"
was proposed for Atlapetes latinuchus (Clements & Shany 2001),
but this was not accepted by SACC (see SACC proposal 84). Changing this
spelling would promote internal consistency of the SACC list, would (in my
view) be a more accurate spelling and would reflect the suggestion of the
authors of the species. I would suggest a "Yes" vote.

Comments from Stiles: "YES. (If such world-renowned
linguistic authorities as Robbins & Stiles used a hyphen, it MUST be right
...) Seriously, it does seem to be the most appropriate spelling."

Comments from Remsen: "NO. The way English words evolve is that
when newly associated words become more frequently used, the progression starts
with two words (e.g., "rain forest"), progresses to a hyphenated form
("rain-forest"), and then they melt together to produce a new word
("rainforest"). By the way, my 1983 Webster's Unabridged does not
list "rainforest" as a word, yet this is now widely used in technical
literature. Another pertinent example is “wild life”, which soon became
“wild-life”, and is now “wildlife”, codified for example in J. Wildlife Management.Thus, those preeminent linguistic
authorities Robbins and Stiles were predictably at the cutting edge way back in
'95 with the hyphenated "Cloud-forest" and now have the special
opportunity to catapult forward into the future with "Cloudforest."
[By the way, whichever way the vote goes, we need to make this consistent
with Otus marshalli, so consider this a vote on both names.]"

Additional comments from
Thomas Donegan: "The main point of
this proposal is for internal consistency - ensuring that Glaucidium nubicola and Megascops
marshalli use the same spelling on their vernacular names. However,
with reference to Van Remsen's comments on the other two spelling proposals, if
every small change bears a cost, then it is worth noting that hyphenated
"Cloud-forest" is the established usage for each of these
recently-described owls."

Additional comments from Stiles: "As for the cloudy
"Cloud-forest" vs. "Cloudforest" thread, I am not convinced
that "rainforest" is all that frequent or that the "cutting
edge" is to cut out the hyphen - or space - between the words ... my
distinct impression is that the hyphenated form is the more frequent, certainly
for cloud-forest. I agree with Thomas that the main point is internal
consistency, hence I feel that we should leave the linguistic cutting edge to the
linguists and lexicographers and go with the more widely used form (hopefully
there are no birds in our area with vernacular names including
"rain-forest" or "rainforest" to complicate things
further!)."

Comments from Robbins: "YES. Gary was correct in referring to us
as authorities, but he inadvertently used the wrong category, the correct one
is: "I know nothing and I can prove it". I agree with fellow linguist
Stiles, and vote to change M. marshalli to Cloud-forest
Screech-Owl, solely on the grounds of consistency in our list."

Comments from Jaramillo: "YES - The history of this name has not
been all that long, and Cloudforest nearly looks German, so I lean to the
addition of the hyphen. It is in these conversations of hyphenation and word
amalgamations that the Spanish speakers shake their heads, maybe even let out
an Ay-Caramba!"